I. Review current mission statements of intelligence organizations to assure direct presidential control

A. Agencies whose mission statements give total control to the President.

1) Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)

2) National Security Agency (NSA)

B. Agencies or entities whose mission statements could cause problems for the President's  future plans; they have to be modified or changed, and/or key appointees must be placed in  high level positions to increase presidential control.

1) The Department of Justice (DOJ), the FBI which reports directly to the DOJ, and the Intelligence Oversight Board (IOB) which reports to the DOJ and the President.

a) Appoint a new director of the FBI - 9/1/93.

b) Position a key figure in the DOJ

c) Issue Executive Order #12863 - 9/17/93 which revoked EO #12537 - 10/28/85 that established the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB) and  EO #12334 - 12/4/81 which established the Intelligence Oversight Board (IOB).

Clinton’s new EO establishes the IOB as a committee of the PFIAB and states that the  IOB "shall consider and take appropriate action with respect to matters identified by  the Director of Central Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency or other agencies  of the Intelligence Community." It is at the discretion of the IOB to report, or not  report, to the Attorney General activities that the IOB believes may be unlawful or  contrary to Executive order or Presidential directive.

d) Position a key figure as Chairman of the IOB who now has the discretionary authority  over intelligence information brought before the PFIAB.

2) National Security Council (NSC).

a) Position a key figure as the National Security Advisor.

II. Select the key figures for future placement in critical positions supporting the mission.

A. National Security Advisor: Samuel R. Berger, a paid lobbyist for the Chinese while he was a partner in the international law firm of Hogan and Hartson where he headed the  firm's international trade group. Mr. Berger is still listed as an attorney with Hogan and  Hartson, therefore, as a partner, he is still receiving benefits, directly or indirectly, from  dealings with China and Russia.

B. Chairman of the IOB: Anthony S. Harrington, is a senior partner of the international  law firm of Hogan and Hartson (with Berger) and, as a senior partner, receives benefits,  either directly or indirectly, from dealings with China and Russia. Mr. Harrington is still  listed as an attorney with Hogan and Hartson.

C. Chairman of the PFIAB: Warren B. Rudman, is a partner in the international law firm  of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison with offices in Communist China and who, as a partner, receives benefits, either directly or indirectly, from dealings with Communist  China.

D. Department of Justice with jurisdiction over the FBI

1) Appoint Assistant Attorney General Webster Hubbell whose strong ties to the Chinese Communists and John Huang (formerly of the Commerce Department) and his  other criminal activity are well documented.

2) Inspector General of the DOJ: Michael R. Bromwich who is/was a partner in the  Washington D.C. office of Mayer, Brown & Platt. The firm has offices in Moscow and  Beijing, with emphasis on Communist China. If he is still a partner, on leave of absence  or not, he is benefiting from the firm's dealings with China and Russia.

III. Further revamp Executive Branch to create an "enabling environment" for easy transfer of  sensitive technology - legal or covert.

A. Issue Executive Order #12938 - 11/14/94 Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, where Sec.3. reads: "Department of Commerce Controls. (a) The Secretary of Commerce  shall prohibit the export of goods, technology, or services subject to the Secretary's export  jurisdiction that the Secretary of Commerce determines, in consultation with the Secretary of State."

B. Load the Commerce Department with loyal 'appointees'.

1) The Washington Post 1/23/97: "revived allegations that the department is a dumping  ground for political appointees."

2) The Washington Post 1/24/97: "Federal personnel data suggests that the Commerce  Department may have been overstocked with political appointees".

3) The Washington Post 2/11/98: The Commerce Department’s policy, under the Clinton  Administration, has been to issue "automatic security clearances for political  appointees".

C. Appoint Ron Brown as Secretary of Commerce - the ‘late’ Ron Brown - whose China  ‘trips’ and legal problems are well documented.

D. Appoint John Huang as an official at the Commerce Department, whose activities are well documented. He was a DNC fundraiser with strong ties to China, Clinton and Web  Hubbell and was a key figure in the illegal Chinese campaign contributions with open  access to the President and the White House. He operated with an illegal security clearance  to enable him access to highly classified information.

E. Appoint William J. Perry (no bio available) as Deputy of Defense Secretary and then as  Defense Secretary. To quote the New York Times 10/19/98: "The Pentagon was  traditionally the strongest voice against technology exports, and Clinton made several  appointments calculated to change the culture. William J. Perry, an executive at a Silicon  Valley company was vocally opposed to the existing system of export controls".

F. Appoint John M. Deutch (no bio available) to a senior post at the Pentagon and then to Director of Central Intelligence. According to the New York Times 10/19/98: Mr. Deutch was "a professor with similar views (to those of Perry)".

G. Relax existing export rules to enable Communist China to obtain a wide range of  sophisticated technology - including high-speed computers and satellite guidance systems.
According to the New York Times 10/19/98: "In 1995, Central Intelligence Agency   analysts wrote a report warning of the military implications of technology transfers to China." "Senior officials acknowledge that President Clinton decided to change the rules without a rigorous review by intelligence officials or other national security experts."

H. Overturn Secretary of State Warren Christoper’s classified order of 10/9/95. (As the  New York Times 5/17/98 put it: "President Clinton took the unusual step of reversing  Christopher’s decision." The order was overturned March 1996.)

1) The New York Times 5/17/98: Christopher’s order had preserved "the State  Department’s sharp limits on China’s ability to launch American-made satellites aboard  Chinese rockets."

2) The New York Times 5/17/98: Christopher had signed this order, on the advice of "the  Defense Department, the intelligence agencies and some of his own advisers, who noted that embedded in commercial satellites were technological secrets that could  jeopardize ‘significant military and intelligence interests.’"

3) The New York Times 5/17/98: After Clinton overturned Christopher’s order, "Control  of export licensing for communications satellites was shifted to Commerce Department,  then run by Ronald Brown."

4) New York Times 10/18/98: Clinton’s action opened "the way to billions of dollars of  satellite sales to Chinese companies. Clinton decided to fulfill his pledge to the Silicon  Valley executives and relax the restrictions." "The new rules took effect in early 1996."

5) New York Times 10/18/98: "Soon after, Chinese companies bought 77 of the  supercomputers which can be used to scramble secret communications or design  powerful nuclear weapons."

I. Appoint Strobe Talbott, Deputy Secretary of State. Mr. Talbott was at Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar at the same time Clinton was there dodging the draft, demonstrating against  America, visiting Russia, etc.

J. Appoint William S. Daley Secretary of Commerce, Clinton’s 1992 Illinois Campaign  Manager, who appears to have been involved in questionable activities in the Chicago area  involving fraud, the IRS and the FBI (http://www.crl.org/daleygeo.html). The lawsuit  against Daley and his firm Daley and George, which dragged on for 5 years, (1992-1997)  was suddenly dropped by the ‘prosecutor’ exactly one month after Daley was sworn in as  Secretary of Commerce on 1/31/97. Also, he may have misrepresented himself in his  Senate confirmation hearings. Mr. Daley is/was a partner in the international law firm of   Mayer, Brown & Platt where he was "concentrating in the area of corporate and government relations matters" (paid lobbyist?). The firm has offices in Moscow and  Beijing, with emphasis on Communist China. If he is still a partner, on leave of absence or  not, he is benefiting from the firm's dealings with China and Russia.

K. Appoint Bill Richardson, Secretary of Energy, from New Mexico - home of the Los Alamos Lab. Mr. Richardson stated on the Chris Mathews' program that China was not  a Communist country, that China is our friend, that China could be trusted to control a port  in Southern California and that China could be trusted with its presence in Panama where it could control both ends of the canal.

IV. As the key figures move into place, the President creates an illusion of being concerned  with National security by issuing the following:

A. Executive Order #12946 - 1/20/95 - President’s Advisory Board on Arms Proliferation Policy. (Established a board to advise the President on implementation of U.S.  conventional arms transfer policy and other issues related to arms proliferation policy.)

B. Executive Order #12949 - 2/19/95 - Foreign Intelligence Physical Searches. (The  authorization of physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes.)

C. Executive Order #12951 - 2/24/95 - Release of Imagery Acquired by Space-Based National  Intelligence. (Declassification of imagery acquired by the three space-based national  intelligence reconnaissance systems and review for future public release of intelligence imagery.)

D. Executive Order #12958 - 3/21/95 - Classified National Security Information. (Prescribes a  uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security  information.)

E. Executive Order #12968 - 8/2/95 - Access to Classified Information ("This order  establishes a uniform Federal personnel security program for employees who will be  considered for initial or continued access to classified information." "… in order to protect  our citizens, our democratic institutions, and our participation with the community of  nations. The unauthorized disclosure of information classified in the national interest can  cause irreparable damage to the national security and loss of human life.") (Clinton, who   has never been investigated for a Top Security Clearance, carefully excluded himself from  this order; otherwise, under this EO, he would be denied access to classified information.)

F. Executive Order #12951 - 10/19/95 - Interagency Security Committee (Provides a  permanent body to address continuing government-wide security for Federal facilities.)

G. Executive Order #13010 - 7/19/96 Critical Infrastructure Protection. (Establishes the  President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection to develop and oversee a  comprehensive national policy and implementation strategy for protecting critical infrastructures from physical and cyber threats.)

V. As Vernon Jordan would say - "Mission accomplished".

Is it a coincidence that the two 'appointees', who have authority over the dissemination of information to the President regarding National Security, Berger and Harrington, are both partners in the same international law firm that has dealings with China and Russia? And that these two 'appointees' are currently listed as attorneys in the Washington branch of Hogan and Hartson (website updated August 1998), where they are, as partners, directly or indirectly, receiving benefits from dealings with China and Russia. This clearly is a conflict of interest (allegiances) which, by law, should deny them a security clearance and access to classified material.

Is it a coincidence that the Inspector General of the DOJ Michael R. Bromwich and the Secretary of Commerce William S. Daley were both partners in the international law firm of Mayer, Brown & Platt, working out of the firm's Washington office? The firm has offices in Moscow and Beijing, with emphasis on China. If they are still partners in the firm, on leave of absence or not, they are benefiting, directly or indirectly, from the firm's dealings with China and Russia and hence have a conflict of interest (allegiances) which, by law, should deny them a security clearance and access to classified material.

Also, George Tenet, Director of the CIA, and Sandy Berger, National Security Advisor, both served on Clinton's national security transition team - a totally failed exercise demonstrating, at best, no knowledge or concern for National Security and the appropriate clearances.

(Security irregularities during the ‘transition’ period are well documented. For example, WSJ 10/05/98 states "14 months into Clinton's first term, more than 100 staffers lacked security clearances". House Report 104-862 states "In general, the FBI files issue shows a lack of respect by the Clinton administration for proper security procedures to protect both the President of the United States and the national security. This is all the more so since the White House ignored recommendations from a Democratic committee chairman of the U.S. Senate to take security precautions in response to reported security irregularities in the first years of the Clinton administration.")

Intentional or not, this provides serious doubt about their ability to handle such high positions in our National Security system.

This summary of events does not begin to scratch the surface, as we do not have access to official information on all those appointees who 'resigned', 'died' or were indicted. An examination of the background and 'allegiances' of those individuals should be considerably more telling than those included here.

And then there are all the rest of Clinton's appointees who are still employed by our Government, whose 'bios' are not in the public domain - most of whom appear to be, at best, grossly incompetent and passing off on any and all of Clinton's plans, or at worst . . . . .

The information in this summary was obtained from official websites:.gov, AOL yellow pages, and webpages of the law firms mentioned herein, with limited use of the regular AOL search of highly reliable sources. While the information included herein is certainly believed to be factual, the readers are left to ponder the evidence and implications and to draw their own conclusions. While we do not state that any of the above mentioned persons are consciously involved in any illegal activity, the facts are certainly curious.

This outlined scenario is an attempt to bring to light the ease with which a corrupt President could destroy our National Security. Hopefully, Congress will exercise every option to stop the damage.

Add this information to the Cox Report, the Thompson Report, the Judicial Watch investigations, the cover-up of espionage, and other treasonous 'accomplishments' of this Administration and the question must be asked:

Is this a coincidence, or a carefully crafted plan to sell out America?

Gretchen Glass is a free lance political writer and can be reached at Bink995210@aol.com

Published in the May 1, 1999 issue of  Ether Zone Online! Ether Zone Online (http://etherzone.com). Reposting permitted with this message intact.

Issue 8 Page 1

Back To Hall of Shame